Similarities and Differences Between Indian and American Elections
April 10, 2015
In his first media interview, eight months after becoming the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi quipped that he found it “amusing” how people, who did not talk about a ‘Modi wave’ in 2014 Lok Sabha elections, “are now engaged in intense discussion” regarding such a wave. He was replying to a question on the perceived end of the ‘Modi wave’ in Delhi assembly elections.
How India Elects Its Prime Minister?
Obviously, the last general election was remarkable for the fact that it was contested very much on the pattern of the presidential elections in the United States of America. It was all about the creation and marketing of Brand Modi – the BJP’s PM candidate, a la the US presidential elections.
This was very unlike the Westminster system of democracy, modelled after the politics of the United Kingdom, that India follows. In the UK, the Head of State (read the President) appoints the Prime Minister. As per the Constitutional convention, the PM choice is decided by a majority of elected Members of Parliament.
However, more often than not, it has been implicitly clear that the sitting PM remained his/her party’s PM face during elections right from the times of the first PM, Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru. The indisputable supremacy of Indira Gandhi within the Congress let her remain the quintessential PM candidate during elections in the 1970s and then in 1980. The endorsement of her name for the PM post by her MPs was just a formality.
The choice for the PM became difficult during the coalition era in the late 80s and the 90s when regional satraps like HD Deve Gowda and a political novice like Inder Kumar Gujral, too, became the PM.
The example of Dr. Manmohan Singh can also be cited.He was never a member of the Lok Sabha (he lost the only time he contested the LS poll in 1999). He was handpicked by the Congress President Sonia Gandhi for the plush post of the Prime Minister in 2004 and then in 2009 general elections, although he personally did not contest the election, the Congress-led UPA returned to power by projecting him as the PM face.
Also consider that the BJP, in recent times, always projected a PM face during the elections – from ex-PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee to Lal Krishna Advani (in 2009) and Narendra Modi.
In practice, the Westminster system has ostensibly given way to the US presidential style of election, more so in recent times. For quite some time now, a debate is raging whether this is the right time to consider switching over to the presidential form of government, which, too, is democratic and transparent and allows people to directly vote for the most acceptable face for the post that has a fixed tenure.
It may be mentioned here that the presidential form of government for the country was indeed debated at the Constituent Assembly, but then Nehru had reportedly prevented much discussion on the issue on the grounds that India had got used to the British parliamentary system.
During the times of Gandhi, too, her trusted lieutenant and cabinet colleague Vasant Sathe had more than once suggested that India should move towards a presidential form of government – a suggestion that was widely believed to have Gandhi’s stamp on it. Considering her autocratic style of functioning, the Opposition had then criticised such a suggestion.
During the times of Gandhi, too, her trusted lieutenant and cabinet colleague Vasant Sathe had more than once suggested that India should move towards a presidential form of government – a suggestion that was widely believed to have Gandhi’s stamp on it. Considering her autocratic style of functioning, the Opposition had then criticised such a suggestion.
Presidential Form of Election in the US
One of the biggest advantages of the presidential form of election is that a directly elected head of government can provide stability as (s)he cannot be dictated by fringe players as was frequently seen during the coalition era as late as in the first decade of the 21st century. Even Dr. Singh had to rue that he was considerably overpowered by the “compulsions of coalition politics”.
Through these columns, we had pointed out that poll campaigning has evolved in the USA over centuries.
The campaigning in the US focusses on :
- 1. Civic engagement through political discourses
- 2. Issues that need to be highlighted
- 3. Reconfirming the choices of the voters based on their political awareness, likes and dislikes.
As we had pointed out then (http://www.elections.in/blog/political-campaigns-and-elections-in-india/), Modi’s campaign in 2014 had these basic and time-tested ‘American’ ingredients.
How is the President of the US Elected?
Like in India, the USA has a bicameral legislature – the Senate and the House of Representatives – with direct elections to them, though vacancies in the Senate may be filled by a gubernatorial appointment. The defining difference though is the direct election of the Head of the State (read the President) in the US.
Like in India, an 18-year-old individual in the US can exercise franchise in the presidential elections. However, the voters actually vote for a slate of electors,who then cast the votes that decide who becomes the President of the United States. Although these electoral votes align with the popular vote in an election, this is a complex process considering that four times in the USA’s history, the person who got elected to the White House did not receive the most popular votes – Rutherford Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, John Quincy Adams, and George W. Bush. One must note that the Electoral College and popular votes were an outcome of a compromise between those constitutional framers who wanted the US Congress (the Senate and the House of Representatives)to choose the president, and those who preferred a national popular vote.
Modi’s Election Campaigns
If popularity is the measure of success, then Modi did get popular votes for himself and his party at the hustings. As the BJP’s PM face, he had succeeded in directly engaging his audience. This had enabled him to dwell on issues that concerned the voters the most with reassuring confidence at a time when Singh was made to withdraw from the race and the Congress was shy of naming its choice for the post.
Modi had capitalised on the opportunity to create a ‘wave’ in his favour that continued till the state elections in Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir. Although Delhi applied brakes on his juggernaut in the assembly elections, his control over the Union government has remained undiminished – much like the President of the US. Any doubt there
?
?
Comments
Post a Comment